“To hide their lack of any actual ideas about what to do, managers sometimes make a big show of rearranging the boxes and lines that say who reports to whom,†columnist Paul Krugman wrote. “You now understand the principle behind the Bush administration’s new proposal for financial reform: It’s all about creating the appearance of responding to the current crisis, without actually doing anything substantive.â€
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- annie_moose on Open thread 7/20
- thomaswitt on National Guard still lacking equipment
- thomaswitt on National Guard still lacking equipment
- Chas on Open thread 7/20
- beber on Open thread 7/20
- Regular on Open thread 7/20
- Pages tagged "winning" on Winning message on personal responsibility
- cosmos_originally on Gore wants carbon-free electricity production
- cosmos_originally on Gore wants carbon-free electricity production
- WSClark on National Guard still lacking equipment
62 Comments
Well… duh!
ditto dog.
Something happens to a man when he puts on a tie.
It cuts off the circulation to his brain.
I’ve yet to meet a management type that I would follow out of a fire.
Now JR you may want to reconsider that! Those management type tend to know how to make a quickest exit! Most to the time it is during times of intense heat.
This is not news (unfortunately). Politicians of all stripes have the belief that it doesn;t matter if they actually DO SOMETHING. THey only have to appear like their are doing something, and they get reelected. Seems to have been working. Incumbent reelection averages over 90%.
From the governor “leadership” school of management. Appear to do something while actually doing nothing or doing something harmful behind the scenes.
Maybe she really DOES have presidential qualities…
And Obama sounds like another MBA president, what with his distaste for details, paper, and organization. Why bother when you have minions to take care of such things. (Hint. See also GW bush)
Krugman is an ass.
Krugman is not smart enough to understand the problem, and Krugman is too lazy to research the problem anyeay.
The proposals make sense, for the future.
What has happened has been explained time and time again on this Blog:
The mortgage business has changed, dramatically, and regulations are outdated.
Most of the lending and real estate issues are regulated by the states, not the feds.
However, most of the financing comes from Wall Street.
Much of what the Federal Government has done has been harmfull.
In fact, the “Community Development” laws and mandates, from Congress, and the various lawsuits springing up from those and other laws, pushed the lenders into a de-facto “quota system” in order to avoid lawsuits.
Maggie Williams just left a failed Sub-Prime lender, where she served as a board member. She now is Hillary’s campaign manager. You know, Hillary Clinton for the Whitewater and Castle Grande real estate experience?
Then, you have Obama, who’s land deal for his own house looks very shady. He got that house with the help of Rezko, who is in court now defending himself against various criminal charges.
Krugman the ass wants to claim that the Bush Administration is not doing anything.
The “Hypocratic Oath” comes to mind:
“First, do no HARM”!
Hippocratic Oath,
Hard for Hypocrites, like Krugman, to understand.
Wow, “Econ101″ –
You’ve really drunk the Kool-Aid, haven’t ya?
Monkey
I know you think everything is Bush’s fault.
However, you will have a hard time dealing with the facts that I just presented.
my my Paul - did Krugman touch a nerve?
You know, I know, even Econ knows. The main motivating factors in this whole mess are Greed, Hubris and Ego. We’ll probably never be able to change any of them, but Gecko was wrong: Greed is not good
“Clear skies initiative”
“Healthy forests initiative”
“No child left behind”
What is past is prologue.
“Econ101″ –
You really need a new nic.
Just yesterday you were extolling the virtues of Wal-Mart suing Debbie Shank.
“Just good business,” was your addled message.
Then Wal-Mart reversed course and dropped its lawsuit. Too bad Wal-Mart doesn’t have your business savy, “Econ101.” They might’ve become a big company.
The thing I love best about Paul on this blog?
He never lets facts get in the way of a good rant…
Conflate much?
“In fact, the “Community Development” laws and mandates, from Congress, and the various lawsuits springing up from those and other laws, pushed the lenders into a de-facto “quota system” in order to avoid lawsuits.”
OK, so now, yer conflating increased loans to minorities and their neighborhoods with the current housing crisis? Woof.
“Maggie Williams just left a failed Sub-Prime lender, where she served as a board member. She now is Hillary’s campaign manager. You know, Hillary Clinton for the Whitewater and Castle Grande real estate experience?”
So now, yer conflating Whitewater and Castle Grande with the CURRENT subprime mortgae problem? Through a Clinton staffer?
Six impossible things before breakfast, as the Queen would say.
And you present these as FACTS?
Well, heheheheh. Like I said, you never let FACTS get in the way of a good rant.
You do get gymnastic style points and we are amused, so we do encourage you to try again…
I believe I addressed this yesterday by saying any attempt by this admin to change financing laws will turn out to be not a feather in bush’s cap, but a shaft in the collective hind quarters of every American in this country (except econ).
Monkey
NO, I did not say that any lawsuit, ever, was a “good thing” but I do support the law, and I do make the point that Walmart did not do anything that the Federal Government and the 50 States do not do, every single day.
Liberals want high estate taxes.
Liberals do not understand that the primary purpose of health insurance is to PROTECT estates.
That is contradictory.
OK, those who thinks Krugman should be listened to on this issue.
What, exactly, does Krugman think we should do?
HUH?
“And since the Fed slashed its target rate and LIBOR rates dropped roughly in sync, the owner of this median-price home is now saving $300 a month compared to last summer, or about $3,600 a year.
That’s a big rebate from the Fed. It’s about three-times bigger than what Uncle Sam is promising. The official IRS notice says the average married couple filing jointly may get $1,200. But Fed head Bernanke is giving median homeowners $2,400 more than that amount. A lot better, right?
Incidentally, all of Bernanke’s emergency machinations to fight the recession in housing and housing-related credit are starting to show very positive effects. Along with various new schemes to backstop the banking system and provide short-term lending help to banks and broker-dealers, many on Wall Street are coming around to the view that something called “systemic risk” is being reduced in the financial world. That includes all those lousy sub-prime securitized mortgages, along with various buyout loans and nasty things like collateralized debt obligations. Sharp-eyed Wall Street analyst Dick Bove puts it quite simply: The worst of the financial crisis may well be behind us.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzQ4YTgwYTk2YmI2YTQ1NDQ5YmI5M2Y1ZDIwOWQyMzM=
From the department of “bernanke’s crap works so well”…
I guess that’s why stocks were down on Bernanke’s comments to congress?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080402/ap_on_bi_ge/bernanke_congress
heeeeeeee. I LOVE it when you trash the facts…
I don’t know what Krugman would do, but the admins rescue of bear stearns, with it’s non-regulatory problems, shows where one problem lies. There should be government oversight on any financial institution so a bailout, costing the taxpayers billions, doesn’t need to be done. Bear Stearns bailout was wrong on way too many levels, and bush’s so called reform does nothing to address the problem there.
Krugman is correct on this: the bush admin is using smoke and mirrors, as usual, in an attempt to sell a dead bird to the public.
Can anyone please tell me specifically what any of the candidates for POTUS will do for “financial reform”?
I read Hillary Rodham Clinton’s speech on the economy, delivered in Philadelphia and read Obama’s remarks that I could find.
But I didn’t see anything in concrete with specific actions either of these candidates propose as a solution.
(And Mcclame = Bush, so I didn’t bother looking for his plan.)
I think we are getting a lot of lip service all the way around. It is nice to beat up on Bush. But wouldn’t it be good to know our candidates have a real, viable PLAN which we can see?
(Plus I’m no so sure if we are again crying for the federal government to solve the worlds problems for us. Afterall, if our government had not run up a 9 trillion dollar never to be paid back deficit, and had not pushed to allow ANYone home ownership, maybe we wouldn’t be where we are today.)
“There should be government oversight on any financial institution so a bailout”
So you are implying:
1. Government oversight would PREVENT any future bailout.
or
2. Or we would still bail them out, but at least we would have us a new and costly bureacracy to make us feel good about it.
Why not keep it simple?
Do NOT bail out private industry when it fails.
Period. End of Story.
. . . and who is paying that $2400? Why, I’ll bet it’s the average American. Money don’t grow on trees, it’s payed to the government by taxpayers, then funneled out to the rich in the form of tax breaks on housing, billion dollar oil subsidies, farm subsidies, et eternal.
There you go again…
Actually, I agree with a lot of what you posted Amway, but this?
“and had not pushed to allow ANYone home ownership”
GOD DAMMIT! IT isnt the low end homes causing the problems. My understanding is that the McMANSION purchasers were the biggest part of the problem.
I doubt the defaults of first time homebuyers would bring the financial markets to their knees. It’s the jumbo mortgages given to all those upwardly mobile folks, (and you know who you are) who couldnt afford the $1 mill plus houses they thought they deserved, and could buy with interst only mortgages.
QUIT blaming the poor folks!
I agree: no bailouts. The point is, when outfits like bear stearns fail, it’s because of either mismanagement or market conditions. The average joe will pay for that over time, thus making regulations to limit these banking concerns essential. That is not being addressed by bush’s so-called reform.
I love how everything is the liberals fault.The poor bankers were forced by congress to lend money to people who couldn’t pay it back. Here is what really happen, mouse over the little arrows in the lower left hand corner.
http://docs.google.com/TeamPresent?docid=ddp4zq7n_0cdjsr4fn&skipauth=true&pli=1
KFG
Daily swings in the market mean nothing. Absolutely nothing.
The percentage of stocks actually traded, compared to the total number of shares in existance, is very, very small every day.
After a huge run up in the market, such as yesterday, you would expect “profit taking” or sales by people who NEED to take money out of the market for personal or business reasons.
The media is rather lazy.
Even the finacial media falls in the trap of using bogus reasons for every daily change in the market.
There is very little cause and effect between the daily changes in the market, and the top news stories.
Sometimes, they are linked, but that is rare.
JM
The FED is in the business of lending money to financial firms.
The FED has not done such lending to non-FDIC firms until the Bear Stearns deal, — at least the Fed had not done so for a very long time.
However, this was and is a LOAN, the taxpayers WILL get the money BACK!
And, this Bear Stearns deal PROBABLY saved an FDIC type bank or two.
This Bear Stearns deal also saved city, state and local financing, all over the country.
Municipal governments have been financed by Wall Street for decades.
“QUIT blaming the poor folks!”
I didn’t single anyone out KFG, did I?
It is a known that politicians and government has pushed to increase home ownership. The rules, often intended for low end market buyers - are not limited to them.
Private industry is out to make a buck. So they also sell homes to people who cannot read, and probably should NOT own a home. Hell, just look at the credit card industry! (BTW, that’s next to fail. We will be asked to bail out?)
So, in short, I am an equal opportunity poster.
I would not bailout rich CEO’s and financial institutions. I’d let them go tit’s up. In fact, by bailing one out - we’ve reset the balance on risk for ALL future investment decisions by this industry. Let them sink.
I would not bailout the S&L’s, the mortgage companies that many think FORCED these poor peole into signing loan notes over their heads. Or gave loans for second/vacation home buyers. Or gave loans to home flippers. Let them sink.
I also would not bail out subprime mortgage holders - or any other home owners who have no one but themselves to blame. Let them sink.
Lastly, the failed homes are NOT just the rich and famous. Please do a little websearch to verfity I am stating the truth. It has been all over the news - the families who are loosing them homes, are not rich. (The rich aren’t newsworthy except when doing drugs, dui’s, or getting divorced).
AmWay
Sorry, you can not run a country without some guarantees, from the fed, for financial firms.
A “run” on financial assets is a psychological panic that no firm is strong enough to survive.
Bear Stearns suffered from a panic. That panic was not justified but that panic was real.
The government had to step in.
If the government had not stepped in, it would have cost the government far more money down the road.
KFG
OK, you think is is ONLY the “mansions” that caused this problem?
Then why in the heck is Hillary talking about helping such people keep their homes?
Paul, please post where I said ONLY the rich were at fault?
Nice try again at changing the subject.
And amway, thanks for just verifying what I said. And… if it’s all over the news, why dont YOU post a link to these low income first time homebuyers that are causing the problem.
Because in the real estate markets, it’s the McMansions that are not selling.
annie moose, thanks for the link. What is described in the “primer” bears a very close relationship to a file I’m working on, especially the first six slides.
Econ, damn, you never respond to my posts. I’m shocked I tell you. I thought I’m invisible and was going to try sneaking in a post or two.
“without some guarantees”
Did the government give Bear Stearns a handout or a loan? Is it going to be paid back?
If it was a handout, then I’m opposed. If the government is handing out money (like the economic stimulous package), then liberals can reason that the individual subprime homeowners should get the same deal. Which I can understand.
Additionally, there is no learning no punishment, no responsibility by the corporations. Nothing stops the next financial business from taking risks and now expect similiar treatment.
And it reaks of favoritism to big business.
“That panic was not justified but that panic was real.”
And the people are waking up! When they realize how really bad things are, the 9 trillion dollar deficit, the never-ending excess spending by government, the refusal of government to do anything but point fingers at the other party, the huge movement of American dollars overseas by a grossly imbalanced trade situation (60 billion leaves our nation every day just for oil), the decline of the dollar, the insolvency of financial institutions, a war without end and without any funds for, the $6K+ average credit card balances, and the loss of faith by other countries in the US Dollar ———
the people SHOULD panic.
All the feds did was buy a little more time.
But it’s coming. And it HAS to come, with the undisciplined actions by our government’s unrestrained spending and continual shoring up of unprofitable, going broke industries.
Just because you asked…
Here’s a couple of linkies to the “mcmansion problem”.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/15/BU7NVIT2O.DTL
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/08/07/mortgage-crisis-hits-wide_n_59450.html
And before you start whining about huffpo, it’s a REPRINT from the Wall Street Journal.
Amway
I often agree with you.
No reason to respond much, if I have nothing new to say.
However, “Bear Stearns” was not, really, “bailed out”
Instead, the Fed financed the purchase of Bear Stearns by another company, JP Morgan.
This is a LOAN and will be paid back.
And, by the way, SIPC insurance DOES carry a government backing, and might have come into play if the government had allowed a “run” on all brokerage firms to take place.
And Amway
The low dollar is actually INCREASING exports.
The low dollar is actually DECREASING imports.
These things have a way of correcting themselves.
The Fed and the Treasury Department are BOTH doing a super job, dealing with this problem.
It is a problem with many, many causes.
Illegal activity will be uncovered, no doubt. But illegal activity did not cause the problem.
The economy has transfered the mortgage financing business from local firms to Wall Street.
However, the regulation of mortgages and the regulation of real estate sales and real estate appraisal ahs remainded, primarily, a state and local function.
It is time for the regulatory systems to modernize.
That is what the Bush administration is trying to do.
Bear Stearns stock used to trade at near $170.00 per share.
At most, shareholders will get about $10.00 per share.
And, them money was LOANED to Morgan to by Bear Stearns.
When has the Bush regime done anything substantial? He pledged to go after corporate corruption but didn’t do anything, and he pledge to do something about America’s addiction to oil. Given how incompetent the Bush regime is they are probably doing their best by doing nothing at all.
Glad you enjoyed the link Vaughn, are you trying to figure out who owns a mortgage?
Econ says,
“However, “Bear Stearns” was not, really, “bailed out””
Kinda of like she’s just a little pregnant.
FSLIC, FDIC, CUNA are all bailout programs.
I understand it restores faith, but it also allows for poor business decisions without anyone paying a price - except the American taxpayers.
And if it was a loan, what is the loan interest rate? Will I be getting a check back any time soon?
Like the $1,200 economic incentive rebate I don’t need and do not want (but will not give back to the treasury to pay off the national debt). It will allow me to reduce my dollar cost averaging of my Roth IRA catchup contribution and instead make a onetime lump sump deposit. Since I’m not getting it until late in the year I wouldn’t have helped “grow the economy” anyway.
Econ 101,
You are very well versed in neoclassical economics. I applaud your efforts. I hope you understand that everything you have been taught about Econ is based upon us living under the Federal Reserve and us being consumers till we die.
I always enjoy you repeating the same tired rhetoric from Economics classes I took in college. I think it would behoove you to learn free market economics. You may see that what we have now in America is far from free. How can you be free, if you don’t have a free market? It’s impossible.
Go to http://www.misesdotorg if you really want to learn real economics for free citizens.
Econ just when we thought things couldn’t get any worse, more bad news:
Will this ‘recession’ never end?
Area’s unemployment rate dips in February
BY DAN VOORHIS
The Wichita Eagle
The Wichita area had an unemployment rate of 3.8 percent in February, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, down from 4.3 percent in January and 4.5 percent in February 2007.
The national unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, up from 4.9 percent in January.
The numbers were not seasonally adjusted.
AmWay the fuel prices are putting a damper on an otherwise healthy economy. As a nation we have the power to control this. It’s calling using our own oil production.
I don’t think any ’save our souls’ program will work until we address this. Economics are economics - that doesn’t change. What changes is the way the news media reports the financial picture and the ‘chicken little’ speeches we hear daily.
Low unemployment rate? Yet home foreclosure rates rival the great depression.Food stamp usage in some northern states at 10% of the population. Economic issues overtake Iraq has a national focus. Labor fore participation declines, that’s U6 on the BLS sites.
Please explain why……
The underemployment rate is rising
Don’t be fooled by the relatively low 4.8% unemployment rate. Other measures, such as the number of people only working part-time, are a sign of recession.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/02/news/economy/jobs_outlook/index.htm?postversion=2008040208
Econ101,
You surely don’t let logic get in the way of your arguments. Imports are getting costlier, duh, I know that from paying gas at the pump, and my heating bill, and other expenses that are higher because of freight charges. And lower interest rate from FED has not changed my interest rate either. Dollar is the weakest in that thirty years. Even Canadian dollar is worth more than one US Dollar (used to be worth 62 cents, not too long ago.)
And your logic is that Whitewater deal, (less than $200,000) where Repblicons (spelling not in-correct) spent $50 millions to investigate (and found nothing against Hillary) comapres to $30 billion dollar FED bailout to corporate America?
Today, Ben Bernake confessed in front of Congress that Fed Reserve may not have proper collateral against the loan it gave to JP Morgan. Fed has not properly valued all complex assets in Bear Stern books that it used as collateral. So if valautions are wrong, down goes tax payer money. And yet you conclude that tax payers will get this loan money back? How? Are you looking at the same crystal ball that showed WMDs in Iraq to Bush and Cheney?
Logic is not very strong point with you.
And tell me, where does $1 Billion per day war in Iraq figure in your calcualtions?
not-econ101
Impeach Bush
Ben and Annie take a look at the real percentage of homeowners who are losing their homes. It’s interesting. In any other sector we wouldn’t be hyperventilating if this were in any other sector.
Wall Street starts to rebound yesterday and what happens - Bernanke shoots down the economy so we cry -alas, alas the sky must be falling.
Don’t be manipulated by the MSM in this election cycle. The numbers don’t support recession. The economy has slowed down, it will rebound it always has and as long as our elected officials don’t hit us with higher taxes on individuals and corporations it always will.
Grim,
If that’s what you believe more power to ya. Me I like to understand all the negatives and down side risks.If things are sunny and bright in your world enjoy.
I don’t think the markets are very different from casino gambling right now. Good luck with your bets.
Kansas (and the rural midwest) may become the economic jewels of America. We never really participated in the housing price boom (except in Lawrence), and the prices of wheat, corn, bean etc are high. Every cheap huckster in the nation is heading this way however. Expect them to get it all screwed up within two years. See you at the tax shelter seminar.
not
JP Morgan is a VERY strong company.
JP Morgan is responsible for paying back the Fed on the Bear Stearns deal.
Annie Moose
You are a chicken little and highly partisan. Did you give Bush any compliments at all, when we went through 52 consectutive months of rising employment?
Why?
We are going through a DEMOGRAPHIC change. Society is getting older. The boomers are hitting retirement age.
These demographic shifts, more than anything else, explain what we are going through right now.
The “peak home buying years” are behind most of the boombers.
The “peak investing years” are behind most the boomers.
The “peak spending years” are behind most of the boomers.
The peak?
In all catagories, it is ages 45 to 50.
Of course, with people living longer, and with immigration, we have other variables to consider.
However, the “birth dearth” happened after the post WW2 baby boom. We have very few people entering these peak economic patterns.
“Its not your Father’s retirement” says the American Express advertising.
I agree to a point.
But some adjustments had to come.
The markets are simply adjusting to changing demographics and changing economic needs.
And, again, real estate is correcting from a “bubble” that can not be blamed on any one person or party.
And, the Federal Government is now looking at a broader role over what used to be, almost exclusively, a state matter: The financing, appraisal, sale and transfer of real estate.
And NO the Bear Stearns stockholders really were NOT “bailed out” — those stock holders are taking a tremendous loss.
Most of the Bear Stearns problem was due to a “run” — market panic, irrational actions of people who were affraid.
Without that fear in the market, Bear Stearns would have survived on its own.
If Bear had gone under?
1.) SIPC insurance would kick in, to “insure delivery” of securities in billions of stock and bond “street name” certificates held by Bear Stearns. Still, the ability of Bear Stearns clients to access those certificates, in everything from Pepsico to Boeing to Kansas Turnpike bonds would have been an open question. How long would it take for regulators to take over and allow an orderly transfer of brokerage accounts away from Bear Stearns?
2.) Municipal financing is a HUGE part of Bear Stearns business. Not just 30 year muni bond underwriting, but also short term, municipal money market type financing. As stated before, Bear Stearns brokerage accounts, held in the name of “innoncent” investors, who had NOTHING to do with the mortgage business, also would hold Muni Bonds.
3.) If Bear Stearns had failed, and people had trouble accessing their stock and bond accounts, and municipalities who were expecting financing were stranded, and massive layoffs began to happen, and fears about brokerage accounts in general infected the markets? — Well, every brokerage firm in the NATION would soon experience a mad panic, a “run” would spread to many different financial firms.
Yes, the Federal Government did an excellent job where Bear Stearns is concerned.
Oh good grief sara. ELLIS county has the second highest housing prices in the state, right behind Johnson county. Lawrence places behind them.
And yes grain prices are high, but so are inputs like fertilizer and fuel. And the weather hasnt been very kind, and the crop isnt even out of the field yet for this year.
Economic jewel? hehehehehehehehehehehehehehheheheheh.
I guess that is why we have to PAY Cessna to stay here?
econ,
If I followed your advice I would be homeless. So not being wreckless and cautious is partisan.By the way back up your bullshit rantings with some links.
What did bush the lesser have to do with any employment gains. Greenspan let interest rates stay low and created a debt bubble in housing. But you knew that already. THe bubble fueled real estate construction all the little goodies needed to fill up the mcmansions that twits like you can’t really afford. Have a nice day.
annie
When did I give you any advice?
I only say that you are a chicken little, and that the sky is NOT falling.
There are many factors contributing to the “housing bubble” — interest rates are a factor, yes.
However, so is the deductability of home mortgage interest, which I support by the way.
Mostly, however, I have to focus on the fact that the vast majority of mortgages are in very good shape, and that the financial problems were with the multiple layers of leverage against many of the loans that did go bad.
And as for your shot at Bush?
You are a typical partisan.
Everything bad that happens is the fault of George Bush.
Everything good that happens is just pure luck?
Lower tax rates, lower capital gains rates, no terrorist attacks since 9-11 — all of these things have helped the economy.
But, I admit, I am from the school that sees the President as a “bit player” in economic matters.
The President is a player, where the economy is concerned, but a small player, in relative terms.
I would also say that the Community Development Act and various HUD programs and VA programs added to the “bubble” — but I support all of those programs.
Bubbles happen.
What was wrong was the fear of litigation was very high, when loans to lower income groups were being evaluated.
“Williams, who took over the reins of Clinton’s campaign in early February, served as a director on the board of the Woodbury, N.Y.-based Delta Financial Corp. from April 2000 until the firm declared bankruptcy in December, according to Securities and Exchange Commission records.
She was originally recruited by former New York City Deputy Mayor Bill Lynch, a Delta consultant. Her assignments were to create a new code of “best practices,” and to improve the company’s crisis management operation in the wake of state and federal predatory lending probes that resulted in a $12 million payout to borrowers.
Her hiring coincided with stepped-up Delta outreach efforts in minority communities, where the company made a large number of its loans, an initiative that included parties for homeless children and mortgage seminars in Brooklyn and Queens.
Williams, 53, isn’t the only Clinton insider who made money from an industry the candidate has demonized. A month ago, The Wall Street Journal reported that Clinton ally and former HUD secretary Henry Cisneros grossed more than $5 million in stock sales and board compensation from Countrywide Financial, one of the nation’s largest subprime lenders.”
http://www.electiongeek.com/blog/2008/03/30/clintons-campaign-director-maggie-williams-was-director-for-failed-sub-prime-lender/
Econ,
If thats what you believe more power to you. People not understanding risk is what got us in the credit crunch to begin with.
Remember the dot.com bust? Same with the savings and loan crisis. Ditto with the great depression. As far as partisan goes I think you are more liberal than I am. You imply bail out the banks, bail out anyone who lost any money investing or it will be the end of capitalism blah blah blah.
If were going to nationalize the banks then I expect to see stock certificates arriving in mail in exchange for my taxes. Come to think of it I want shares in haliburton, kbr, custer battles carlye group, and all the other companies that received no bid contracts from uncle sam. If were going to go 100% socialist then I want my cut.
rant off/
Paul - most of the bubble has been in high-dollar speculation; not in ‘regular’ community homes.
Germie and paulie started celebrating the “good” news for the economy a little too soon.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080403/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/economy
The sky might not be falling, yet, but the economy is NOT the picture of health you want it to be. But just keep whistling past that graveyard and HOPE the economy doesnt get worse before November. But it will, ’cause I think bushco is out of short term fixes…
concerned, we cannot wonder that it should have been so much more attended first time lesbian video still be looked upon as the average price. All accounts, however, hsnrihvjdrj
buy xanax online without prescription